kaoz
General
inter faesces et urinam nascimur
Posts: 1,109
|
Post by kaoz on Jan 13, 2021 0:23:48 GMT 1
Well yeah, it would be strange to fire a mortar from within a living room or a bathroom, but the MG would have been nice... I know, in the ResEditor, one can set a MG or AT for a bunker and if i remember correct, it's not possible for houses.
|
|
Grot
General
J-23 znowu nadaje
Posts: 4,047
|
Post by Grot on Jan 13, 2021 1:46:33 GMT 1
Technically you could fire mortar from balcony , roof or semi destroyed building but I understand your point with game limits
|
|
|
Post by keepitsimple on Jan 16, 2021 11:35:05 GMT 1
Hi kaoz, You can of course make a soldier with has as weapon a 50 cal browning (US), or a Vicker heavy MG (GB) or Maxim (USSR). This soldier can go into a building and it will fire its heavy MG. I wouldn't give this soldier to player but only give to AI in a building.
|
|
kaoz
General
inter faesces et urinam nascimur
Posts: 1,109
|
Post by kaoz on Jan 17, 2021 0:18:58 GMT 1
Hi kaoz, You can of course make a soldier with has as weapon a 50 cal browning (US), or a Vicker heavy MG (GB) or Maxim (USSR). This soldier can go into a building and it will fire its heavy MG. I wouldn't give this soldier to player but only give to AI in a building. Your suggestion is indeed a good solution, but Grot was initially talking about mortars and MG's putting on tanks, i answered putting them in trucks, houses. It's not that i need a housed MG in particular and i don't mind the BK limitations at all in the end.
|
|
Grot
General
J-23 znowu nadaje
Posts: 4,047
|
Post by Grot on Jan 22, 2021 14:46:45 GMT 1
|
|
Grot
General
J-23 znowu nadaje
Posts: 4,047
|
Post by Grot on Jan 25, 2021 18:00:17 GMT 1
I think we should give more attention to testing of the new balance of aviation I tried GZM Aviation V3 patch on CFCS but it crashed the game (understandably) as soon as enemy fighters engaged my planes. Here is air fight without it and some common problems I dont fully understand mechanics behind GZM patch but it seems to eliminate many problems in GZM mod
edit: I will post new video on the topic of BK aviation bugs soon
|
|
Grot
General
J-23 znowu nadaje
Posts: 4,047
|
Post by Grot on Jan 26, 2021 16:25:02 GMT 1
I've been testing aviation patch in GZM USSR campaign that I'm currently playing I noticed few changes such as Scout planes have less visibility on the ground so do Ground attack planes ( some units are not visible ) Improved AA weapons , Dog fights seem to last longer (probably due to armor or ammo changes) Will post more as I go.
|
|
Grot
General
J-23 znowu nadaje
Posts: 4,047
|
Post by Grot on Jan 28, 2021 21:52:17 GMT 1
test GZM mod with aviation patch V3 (increased game resolution to 2K for God view ) Ground attack planes dont prioritize chasing Scout plane all over map (good) after while 2 Planes "glued" together (bad) Rest judge for yourself
|
|
olvie
Potporucnik
Posts: 104
|
Post by olvie on Feb 10, 2021 1:41:21 GMT 1
Finally gotten to play a bit again after a longer exodus and I've realised that I'm a bit frustrated with how buildings work in BK.
Firstly, they take no splash damage, which just looks and feels odd when there's a heavy artillery shell exploding right next to a tiny wooden house and the house takes no damage whatsoever. You can even detonate a nuke next to it (literally, I tried it in GZM), buildings never take any damage unless it's a direct hit. I take it this is hardcoded in the game or else someone would have tackled this issue ages ago... but in a perfect dream successor of the original BK, this would definitely have to work differently.
Secondly, destroyed buildings feel equally wrong for so many reasons. Tiny pieces of rubble on the ground obscure the line of sight, tanks can't pass through the remains of a burned down shed, infantry can't pass through the rubble of a flattened house. And probably most importantly, infantry should be able to re-enter destroyed buildings. Historically speaking, I think it's safe to say that rubble and ruins provided pretty viable cover for infantry, sometimes even more so than the intact building. It would make sense if the occupying infantry takes heavy damage or is wiped out when a building's health goes to zero, but afterwards it should be possible for infantry to re-enter the ruins. Right now ruins feel like these insurmountable walls on the battlefield and it's just counter-intuitive.
Does anyone know how storming an occupied buildings works, game mechanics-wise? I don't get the impression that sending in close combat troops with sub-machine guns and hand grenades makes any difference to just sending only riflemen or even officers when you've entered the building and the fighting goes on inside. All infantry seems to be performing the same and it's just a numbers game, but I could be wrong!
|
|
|
Post by Squire James on Feb 10, 2021 2:32:41 GMT 1
Finally gotten to play a bit again after a longer exodus and I've realised that I'm a bit frustrated with how buildings work in BK. Firstly, they take no splash damage, which just looks and feels odd when there's a heavy artillery shell exploding right next to a tiny wooden house and the house takes no damage whatsoever. You can even detonate a nuke next to it (literally, I tried it in GZM), buildings never take any damage unless it's a direct hit. I take it this is hardcoded in the game or else someone would have tackled this issue ages ago... but in a perfect dream successor of the original BK, this would definitely have to work differently. Secondly, destroyed buildings feel equally wrong for so many reasons. Tiny pieces of rubble on the ground obscure the line of sight, tanks can't pass through the remains of a burned down shed, infantry can't pass through the rubble of a flattened house. And probably most importantly, infantry should be able to re-enter destroyed buildings. Historically speaking, I think it's safe to say that rubble and ruins provided pretty viable cover for infantry, sometimes even more so than the intact building. It would make sense if the occupying infantry takes heavy damage or is wiped out when a building's health goes to zero, but afterwards it should be possible for infantry to re-enter the ruins. Right now ruins feel like these insurmountable walls on the battlefield and it's just counter-intuitive. Does anyone know how storming an occupied buildings works, game mechanics-wise? I don't get the impression that sending in close combat troops with sub-machine guns and hand grenades makes any difference to just sending only riflemen or even officers when you've entered the building and the fighting goes on inside. All infantry seems to be performing the same and it's just a numbers game, but I could be wrong! I am glad someone else has brought this up Alas, it does appear to be a hardcoded issue. I have tried to change it, but it seems to be the case. Weirdly, splash damage is a thing in BK. Walls, objects and such DO take such such damage from nearby explosions. I wonder whether it's something to do with the "armour" value of buildings. I'll experiment further but I think it's hardcoded. The same with other issues you've mentioned; they're pretty much unchangeable and I agree entirely. As for your question regarding close combat, I believe you are right in that it's just a matter of numbers. The actual duration of close combat can be altered in the const file, but this merely alters it for all infantry; there is no parameter altering the ability of infantry in close combat on a per unit basis. There is an "however" here though. When you have infantry with weapons that are properly balanced (rifles firing at accurate rates of fire etc, then sub-machine guns and the like *are* more useful in closing to close combat, firing on the building etc simply by virtue of firing more rounds at the enemy than rifles will. The problem with stock is that everything fires too quickly.)
|
|
kaoz
General
inter faesces et urinam nascimur
Posts: 1,109
|
Post by kaoz on Feb 10, 2021 2:42:48 GMT 1
A building is made up out of 3 stages: whole (100%), battered (50%) and destroyed (0%). You simply will have to live with that. Sure, it would be nice to have 100 stages and a different stage for each 1%, but i guess you would need to rewrite BK's engine...
Same for passing the rubble: a buildings contains an impassable 'floor' setting, that remains even when destroyed. Again, you would need to rewrite the way it works.
The game was released in 2003, therefor created a few years before... so what did you expect? Personally, i think one shouldn't be too critical about the realism of the game in total. To me, it's the gameplay that matters. I also like Age of Empires 2 more than AoE 3 just because of the gameplay, even when AoE 3 looks better...
About storming a building: if the building allows at least 3 squads inside, you mostly win by entering 2 squads against one. Type of weapon might matter, because each type has a certain dispersion, bullet rate, etc.
Yeah, and AI isn't always fair... my artillery shelling takes years to hit the enemy, while the AI hits my forces in just seconds... same with tanks sometimes It's just the way it is... but as the title of this topic says: try to have fun and play...
|
|
olvie
Potporucnik
Posts: 104
|
Post by olvie on Feb 10, 2021 17:18:56 GMT 1
The game was released in 2003, therefor created a few years before... so what did you expect? Personally, i think one shouldn't be too critical about the realism of the game in total. To me, it's the gameplay that matters. I also like Age of Empires 2 more than AoE 3 just because of the gameplay, even when AoE 3 looks better...
Yeah, and AI isn't always fair... my artillery shelling takes years to hit the enemy, while the AI hits my forces in just seconds... same with tanks sometimes It's just the way it is... but as the title of this topic says: try to have fun and play... Well, that's kind of the thing, the building situation is really more of a game design choice than a technical limitation. I'm afraid it's just something the developers overlooked when making the game and now we're stuck with a hardcoded gameplay limitation. Though you're right of course, there's no use complaining. The graphics are not the issue, in fact what I love about the game is its visual style and how well it has aged. I'd much rather have a pretty isometric game than another crappy looking, 3D graphics real time strategy title. It does invite to dream about what a modern BK1 remake could be like. And I'm not talking about the AI using artillery, I mean that buildings do not take any damage unless it's a direct hit. Just feels odd what a bomb or a heavy artillery shell explodes in a narrow street and the houses are visibly completely unaffected. But as I said, the bigger issue for me is how destroyed buildings work in the game.
|
|
kaoz
General
inter faesces et urinam nascimur
Posts: 1,109
|
Post by kaoz on Feb 10, 2021 22:42:02 GMT 1
I mean that buildings do not take any damage unless it's a direct hit. Just feels odd what a bomb or a heavy artillery shell explodes in a narrow street and the houses are visibly completely unaffected. But as I said, the bigger issue for me is how destroyed buildings work in the game. True... You might get closer to what you want with changing parameters in the building's xml (and maybe consts.xml settings). A building has specific hitpoints, maxHP, minArmor, maxArmor, etc. that can be tweaked. My knowledge ends at maxHP, i'm afraid... SJ probably has more experience there. Nevertheless, i believe it will be a lot of work changing and testing all that.
Don't take my previous words offensive, Olvie, it's just an/my opinion. I recently replayed all the campaigns of BKII, Panzers and Company of heroes. They're ok, they look good and worth playing (even a second or third time), but still in the end i keep returning to BK1. Even with sights and ranges set to '30', i like its gameplay (and 'simplistic' style). But this is my very own experience; i'm not talking for anyone else and certainly not trying to convince others of my opinion.
If you want to go deeper into the consts.xml, try this maybe:link It seems pretty limited however when it comes to buildings, but maybe there's something you can change about artillery... not sure.
|
|
|
Post by Herr Kodax on Feb 11, 2021 18:42:03 GMT 1
It'll only make him sadder, if he sees that BK was originally supposed to have morale implemented.
|
|
|
Post by Quintaxel on Feb 12, 2021 17:27:09 GMT 1
I doubt whether the primary concern of the developers of BK was realism. After all BK is an RTS (or better Real Time Tactics) game with the emphasis on ‘game’.
And a great game it is, still after almost 18 years after its release.
IMO of the key success factors of BK is its simplicity both in gameplay and modding.
I have been playing Sudden Strike 4 lately. If you like the gameplay of SS4 is a matter of taste. The game engine (Unity) is much more advanced that the Enigma engine and should be suitable to make a next gen version of BK.
As a matter a fact, the zoom in-out mod in SS4 makes the game look a lot like BK.
However, more recent game engines like the Unity engine have a higher threshold for modding. Making a map in BK is relatively easy compared to making a map in SS4. Same goes for game mods and graphical mods. and scripting. My point is that if BK had all the desired features it would harder to mod. It would just be another version of SS4
|
|